[Nsi-wg] NSI service

[Henrik Thostrup Jensen]

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, John MacAuley wrote:

> Looks like I have some explaining to do.  We forget that not everyone is 
> participating in the NSI weekly meetings and the extra special OGF 
> conference meetings.  Lucky for you, but unfortunately you miss the 
> results of some of the discussions.

One of the key ideas with a standard is that one is supposed to be able to 
implement it without having overheard some decision on how to represent 
something in a phone meeting :-).

> Here is what a request should look like based on all the agreements we 
> have reached.  We need to make sure everyone follows this pattern or 
> chaos will prevail :-)

Thanks for providing an example, it is highly needed.

I have a few comments, but we should definitely wait to after Rio with 
modifying anything.

>         <int:correlationId>urn:uuid:73d32a9d-fc68-4736-9c24-99abce1aaea3</int:correlationId>

This is not a UUID (correlationId is a uuidType). It is a URI/URN, which 
happens to by a UUID. Also there is a slew of ways to represent UUIDs. I 
do not see the reason for forcing the usage of UUIDs. Given the 
constraints I would have choosen UUIDs myself, but forcing a specific 
technology into the spec. seems a bit silly. A string would do fine as 
type.

>            <requesterNSA>urn:ogf:network:nsa:Aruba-OpenNSA</requesterNSA>
>            <providerNSA>urn:ogf:network:NSnetwork:Martinique-DynamicKL</providerNSA>
>               <globalReservationId>urn:ogf:network:service:Aruba:conn-560</globalReservationId>
>               <connectionId>urn:uuid:593d9816-0574-471d-b2a9-101e63a5d0f2</connectionId>

Are we just using URNs because it is possible? I have a hard time seeing 
what value they add here? (they do not provide a global namespace).


     Best regards, Henrik

  Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at ndgf.org>
  NORDUnet / Nordic Data Grid Facility.